Girl murdered in drive-by shooting: Mistaken identity or not, no excuse for murder

Can you imagine the shock and horror that went through the little girl’s mother and three sisters who were in the car at that time of that “mistaken identity” shooting of little Jazmine?
Drive-by shootings are just that — no stopping to check if you have the right vehicle or the right people (right in this case meaning your intended target); you approach, you shoot, and you keep right on going, even though in this case the target car was at a stoplight.
There didn’t seem to be any comment as to whether or not the shooter’s vehicle was also stopped at that light — which seems highly unlikely.
How could anyone in that targeted vehicle have adequately described either the driver or the shooter at a moment like that? If they could have, it would have been more than amazing. Even delayed memory flashes could not bring to mind a good enough description of the driver or the shooter, while the color of the vehicle in their memories (red, according to family members in the target car) turned out to have been a truck they had seen at the light, but was not the one the suspects were driving.
While little Jazmine Barnes’ family initially believed the shooting could be racially motivated, it was quickly discovered, thanks to a tip from a civil rights activist, that the person of interest for the sheriff’s department to check on should be Eric Black Jr., a 20-year-old black man who admitted he was driving a dark-colored SUV from which a passenger opened fire, authorities said.
The second suspect, according to Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez, has been identified and is also black, but he did not say if that suspect was in custody. While the sheriff did say that they were still investigating, he also said that the tragedy did not appear to be race-related.
While all that was little enough to bring any comfort to the family, the father of Jazmine, Chris Sevilla, stated it was a bit of relief to him.
During a court hearing, prosecutors revealed that a confidential source had contacted the sheriff by email and told him the killers had “shot the car by mistake.” Apparently the suspects thought the vehicle was someone else’s and were firing on purpose at those whom they believed were their intended target. Why they were shooting was apparently not addressed at that time.
The sheriff said there was, in fact, a red truck at a stoplight just before the shooting, but further investigation proved that the driver of that truck did not appear to have been involved. It was night, everything happened so quickly, and such memory mistakes are bound to happen. However, authorities will talk to the person in that red truck to get his account of the shooting event.
Prosecutors said the handgun believed to have been used in the shooting had been found in Black’s home.
Regardless of the mother’s mistaken belief that it was a white man — and having a composite sketch of a white man in a dark hood drawn up and circulated — it is easy to understand such a mistake considering there was a similar and unsolved incident in the area in 2017 in which a gunman described as white shot into a vehicle carrying at least two black people. Race/hate crimes are emotional on both sides of the crime and can contribute to such emotional mistakes.
But this column is not about the news of the killing. That can be found in many other places. It’s important to know that such things are still happening so we never take our safety — even in just driving to the grocery store, as Jazmine’s family apparently was — for granted.
There is no way to anticipate such a crime as the above crime of murder due to mistaken identity, but it does bring up the subjects of hate, race issues, and how we raise our children to go forth into the world as thinking adults.
The things we say around the house when our children are in earshot get into their minds and can sometimes stay there and even turn into fodder for their unacceptable behavior as they go off on their own. If a video was being made of all those times words of hate were used toward another race or group of people while your children were within hearing range, why should it be a surprise that one of your children decided to act on YOUR hate and take it to the streets?
Unlike facts, which can often show up the falsehoods for what they are, emotions are in a totally different realm. We may not like that some formerly believed “facts” turn out to be untrue, but at least — if we have a reasoning mind and an ounce or two of common sense (the world is NOT flat) — we can probably accept them without wanting to shoot down the bearer of such information. Dealing with the heat of emotion is not quite so simple. If we hate someone for their color, their religion, or maybe even their profession — or for something we heard our parents teach us without their knowing we were listening — that hate clings to our innards like glue until we can grasp the absurdity of our prejudice and let it go due to common sense, additional information, or even under the concept of brotherhood.
While there was much support for the family of Jazmine from people all over the country and from all walks of life, even to that of offering a $100,000 reward leading to the arrest of the perpetrators, that was not, and will not ever be, enough to eradicate the kind of thinking that is the minds of those who would shoot at anyone for their own self-absorbed reasons. Such reasons can involve hating someone’s color, the fact that they may have been annoyed by the targeted individual(s) earlier in the day, they may have been cut off at a previous stoplight by someone who is now a would-be murder target, or any other frivolous reason that might stir the killing instinct into reality such as it did for those two young black men.
While good and conscientious parenting can go a long way toward raising non-violent children — both latent and openly self-expressive — we, all of us, must consider the culture we allow to be bombarding our youth all the time, from games and comics, to movies and videos
and such, all with the understated and suggestive look of violence, if not outright torture and blatant murder.
Yes, I am suggesting that we, the public (not all of us, of course), and those who are only in it for their profits, are filling the minds of our youth with images and ideas that they are selling and that are freely available to them; that what they want is more important than what other people want and therefore, if it takes stealing, lying, cheating, or killing, it’s more or less okay.
They let their videos and movies do the talking and would never admit that they may be contributing to the overwhelming amount of violence that gets into a young person’s mind that may one day “allow them and even encourage them” to shoot and kill another person.
Mistaken identity or not, what could possibly make that drive-by shooting acceptable on any level?
* * * * *
Maramis Choufani is the Managing Editor of the Las Vegas Tribune. She writes a weekly column in this newspaper. To contact Maramis, email
her at maramis@lasvegastribune.com.

City Council votes an abeyance of ordinance to jail developers
By Alexandra Cohen
De Oro Media Group
Las Vegas Tribune Exclusive
Tuesday the Las Vegas City Council Recommending Committee voted for an
abeyance on the controversial ordinance — Bill No. 2018-24 — sponsored
by City Councilman Steve Seroka, a councilman who is being sued in
Federal Court by developer Yohan Lowie for bias. This abeyance now
moves the bill to the September 4, 2018 Recommending Committee, then
to be heard by the full City Council on September 6.
The proposed bill will severally penalize developers with excessive
fines and jail time for not abiding by new standards. The bill is
opposed by the Commercial Real Estate Development Association (NAIOP),
The Latin Chamber of Commerce and Laborers Local 872, along with
others in the building and trades community. The bill NO.2018-24, also
known as the «Yohan Lowie bill,” is an ordinance to amend LVMC Title
19 (The Unified Development Code) to adopt additional standards and
requirements regarding the repurposing of certain golf courses and
open spaces.
The ordinance was met with strong position from those speaking at
today’s meeting. Tommy White, Secretary Treasurer of the Laborers
Local 872 said “this City Council is sending the wrong message to not
only the local building community, but to the entire nation. This is
simply government overreach.” Mr. White vowed to bring 600 of his
union members to the next meeting to protest the flawed ordinance.
Peter Guzman, President of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, stated, “I
have received numerous calls from my members opposed to this
ordinance. This ordinance is contrary to our group’s philology and
focus of promoting commerce and growth in our community.” Todd Davis,
General Council, EHB Companies pointed out to the Recommending
Committee that “the Agenda states ‘NO FISCAL IMPACT,’ when clearly
there is a fiscal impact to taxpayers ranging from substantial legal
fees to defend the ordinance, to hundreds of millions of dollars if
the ordinance is found to be a taking.”
Councilwoman Michele Fiore publically and vehemently objected to the
ordinance in the July 18 council meeting and at times verbally sparred
with the bill sponsor, Councilman Seroka, citing that the ordinance
started as a 5-page ordinance and FAILED in the Las Vegas Planning
Commission by a 5 to 1 vote. Now, behind the scenes, it has been
expanded to a 13-page document and is being considered for approval.
Developer Yohan Lowie, stated, “this is typical of the corruption and
disingenuous acts of certain members of the city of Las Vegas who have
demonstrated for the past three years, and one of the reasons why I am
in litigation with Councilman Seroka and Bob Coffin for the animus
they continue to display. They are enacting a law to create criminal
penalties for the property no longer being a golf course and no longer
being green. All property owners should be concerned.” This bill may
be as far-reaching as to affect individual homeowners living in a golf
course community.
SECTION 7 in the bill states: Whenever in this ordinance any act is
prohibited or is made or declared to be unlawful... the doing of such
prohibited act or the failure to do any such required act shall
constitute a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, shall be
punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment for a
term of not more than six months.
Mr. Lowie has hired famed criminal defense lawyer David Chesnoff to
represent his interests in possible forthcoming criminal offenses that
may arise from this bill. Additionally, along with attorney and Lt.
Governor Mark Hutchison the City has been put on notice through a
letter, which states the City will be in violation of the EX Post
Facto Clause and Equal Protection Clause and a Taking by Eminent
Domain.
After the July 18 city council meeting, developer Yohan Lowie stated,
“If they want to put me in jail, they can. I will fight to my last
breath to prevent the City from EVER taking my property away. I will
continue to fight this matter all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to
get justice.”